There's something fishy about Terry Rozier paying for the attorney of his lifelong friend and co-defendant in the federal case about NBA gambling that has ensnared them both, federal prosecutors claim in a new filing.
In a letter sent on Tuesday (Dec. 16) to Judge LaShann DeArcy Hall, prosecutors point out that NBA star Rozier is doing two things at once: paying for an attorney for another defendant in the case, his lifelong friend Deniro Laster; while simultaneously having his own attorney make public statements indicating that they want to place responsibility for wrongdoing solely on Laster, while Rozier "didn't do anything."
That situation, they continue, may present a conflict of interest, so they want to make sure both the judge and Laster himself are aware of everything.
Rozier is accused of telling his friend Laster that he was going to pull himself out of a March 23, 2023 game early, claiming injury. He did in fact leave the game about nine-and-a-half minutes in. Laster then allegedly sold the information for $100,000. The people who bought the info then supposedly bet on Rozier under-performing in the game. Both men are charged with conspiracy to commit wire fraud and conspiracy to commit money laundering.
However, prosecutors point out in their new letter that Rozier's attorney has a different interpretation than they do of what went down leading up to the 2023 game — one that puts all the blame on Laster.
They quote an October interview on Fox News with Rozier's attorney James Trusty.
"Confiding in a friend, a childhood friend and saying man it’s the end of the season, we are out of the playoffs, I’ll sit early in this game, that’s not a crime . . . that is confiding in a friend," Trusty said. "But [Rozier] told a friend, and whatever that friend did is not on Terry . . . This is a situation where a friend took information, ran with it, Terry didn’t do anything."
The "friend" in question, prosecutors say understatedly, "appears to be Laster."
"Because a third party (Rozier) is paying Laster’s legal fees in this case, it is possible that Laster’s counsel faces a potential conflict of interest," they write. "The potential conflict is compounded by the fact that Rozier is a co-defendant who, based on his attorney’s public comments, is blaming Laster for Rozier’s indictment and is likely to assert a defense in court that is contrary to Laster’s interests."
Prosecutors proceed to lay out the ways this situation could affect Laster's attorney, Evan Corcoran, who they confirm told them himself that Rozier is paying his fees. Prosecutors are asking for a special hearing, called a Curcio hearing, to advise Laster about the potential conflicts and to see what he wants to do it.
Laster submitted a response on Thursday (Dec. 18). He filled out a questionnaire, saying that he "knowingly and intelligently waive[s] any potential conflict of interest," and wants to stay with Corcoran — so no hearing will be necessary. The judge has not yet ruled on the matter.